Rotella v. Pederson’s Empirical Analysis
144 F.3d 892 · 1998
Citation profile
6 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2016 · most notably Rotella v. Wood (2000), Kach v. Hose ex rel. St. Moritz Security Services, Inc. (2009)
6 federal appellate ·
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Erie Co v. Tompkins · Board of Regents of Univ. of State of NY v. Tomanio · Owens v. Okure · United States v. Parker · Borderlon v. Peck
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]f a counterclaim or cross claim arises out of the same transaction or occurrence that is the basis of an action, a party to the action may file the counterclaim or cross claim even though as a separate action it would be barred by limitation on the date the party’s answer is required.” Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 16.069(a). Section 16.069 is not applicable here because none of Inteplast’s claims, save its claim for breach of the PGA, arise out of”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“consistent with the federal tolling provisions”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.